Cisco boards and councils

Many of the comments see it obvious mistake from Cisco to go for Council & borads and even the some acquisitions that they made. Well, now it is evident to Cisco too. Let me make a strong statement that Cisco has been on of the very few companies doing so many acquisitions and still being successful (atleast till a couple of years back). I assume that we all agree that mutiple papers have been published on why and how Cisco's acquisition's success rate is so high. I don't claim that the board and councils are the only reason for success, but they have a good share of reaching to success. The idea behind the boards is to have an expert representative from each of the verticals and take a wise decision.

Now, I understand that Cisco has failed in last couple of years to maintain its strength (Routers and Switches), as it focussed more on adjacencies. The boards have failed to make right decisions. The vision was slightly misaligned and that gave an edge to competitors to sneak through the Cisco's profit. It would be interesting to see how John Chamber addresses the situation. He has taken Cisco up to a good position and also, he has agreed that last few years Cisco was focusing on wrong things. Now that the decisions made earlier have failed, it is easy for anyone to get criticize the decisions made, and I can find thousands of articles on internet on the same. Interesting would be to see some of the suggestions on what are the options to recover from it and what Chamber does.